I wondered how far this "We have to protect property" idea would be taken. If say someone who owned vast amounts of land and property was elected would they be entitled to have all of that land and properties protected by the state, regardless of the cost?
Personally I would say the official residences and one home address is enough.
“We are killing like we haven’t killed since 1967”
It’s been a while so I will start us off…….whats for supper and why?
